EDGAR CAYCE'S PSORIASIS TREATMENT
Dudley Delany
Please visit my new psoriasis website:
http://community.webtv.net/DudleyDelany/EDGARCAYCESPSORIASIS
Sincerely,
Dudley Delany, R.N., M.A., D.C.
DaveW
Can't even get his own URL correct:
http://community-2.webtv.net/DudleyDelany/EDGARCAYCES/index.html
Unfortunately, the only support Dudley provides for Cayce's "treatment"
is the work of the A.R.E., which is devoted to proving Cayce correct, so
there's a bit of bias here. Note also that he spends most of his time
discussing Cayce's words on mutliple sclerosis, and his own personal
testimonial for them, but I didn't see Dudley talking about what *kind*
of MS he has (had?). There's a type called "relapsing-remitting" MS,
which often resolves on it's own for longish periods of time. If Cayce's
"readings" 'cured' him of RRMS, there's a good chance it just vanished
by itself (this is called "regression" in skeptic's terms). See also
http://www.skepdic.com/cayce.html
- Dave W.
http://members.aol.com/psorsite/
HHerbalOne
>Date: 5/29/00 9:01 PM EST
>
>Please visit my new psoriasis website:
>
>http://community.webtv.net/DudleyDelany/EDGARCAYCESPSORIASIS
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Dudley Delany, R.N., M.A., D.C.
Unable to open
http://community.webtv.net/DudleyDelany/EDGARCAYCESPSORIASIS. The site
reports that the item you requested could not be found.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not Found
The requested URL /DudleyDelany/EDGARCAYCESPSORIASIS was not found on
this server.
H.
Dudley Delany
Don & Janet
"DaveW" <stran...@aol.com> wrote...
>
> Can't even get his own URL correct:
>
> http://community-2.webtv.net/DudleyDelany/EDGARCAYCES/index.html
>
> Unfortunately, the only support Dudley provides for Cayce's "treatment"
> is the work of the A.R.E., which is devoted to proving Cayce correct, so
> there's a bit of bias here. Note also that he spends most of his time
> discussing Cayce's words on mutliple sclerosis, and his own personal
> testimonial for them, but I didn't see Dudley talking about what *kind*
> of MS he has (had?). There's a type called "relapsing-remitting" MS,
> which often resolves on it's own for longish periods of time. If Cayce's
> "readings" 'cured' him of RRMS, there's a good chance it just vanished
> by itself (this is called "regression" in skeptic's terms). See also
>
> http://www.skepdic.com/cayce.html
>
> - Dave W.
> http://members.aol.com/psorsite/
Gee Dave, I just went into a Cayce like self induced hypnotic trance and
diagnosed that we would make Dudley a very happy man if we all bought his
book. Naturally, being the innocent, trusting type, I would never assume
that he would post here *just* to lead us to his sales pitch.
Janet
evetsm
www.skepdic.com Hahahaha! You should stop reading these
conspiracy sites and start with medline and maybe you'll learn
something !
Try this little illuminator, Dave, from a quote from skepdic.com
regarding Cayce.
Substitute the word "MD(s)" for all references to "Cayce" in this
paragraph:
"It is true, however, that many people considered themselves
cured by Cayce and that's enough evidence for true believers. It
works! The fact that thousands don't consider themselves cured or
can't rationalize an erroneous diagnosis won't deter the true
believer."
Read this from medline and learn :
The abdominal brain and enteric nervous system.
McMillin DL; Richards DG; Mein EA; Nelson CD
J Altern Complement Med, 1999 Dec, 5:6, 575-86
Abstract
Conventional medical treatment for neurologic disorders such as
epilepsy, migraine, and autism focuses on the brain. Although
standard medical treatment is often helpful, the underlying
causes of these disorders are not well understood. Furthermore,
some individuals respond poorly or not at all to regular
medicine. Evidence is accumulating in the medical literature that
the enteric nervous system (ENS)-that part of the nervous
system associated with the alimentary canal-also plays a role in
these disorders. Historically, the concept of an autonomous
abdominal nervous system was advocated by Byron Robinson,
Johannis Langley, and Edgar Cayce. The work of these three
prominent historical figures is considered along with modem
view-points on the abdominal nervous system. Complementary
therapies that address the nervous system of the abdomen have
potential as useful adjuncts to conventional treatment for
certain neurologic disorders.
Interesting, eh ? Maybe Cayce was not ALL full of it ? Maybe some
of the stuff DID work ? Maybe he knew something that you don't ?
Impossible.
Steve
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Sarah Brock
Several weeks ago a very sincere friend recommended Edgar Cayce's
treatment for scleroderma (I have both pp and scleroderma) to me.
Trying to be open-minded, I picked up a book on Cayce at Barnes &
Noble and the very first sentence read "I once knew a man who, when he
fell down, did not bruise, he chipped." !!! How asinine can one get.
It's bad enough to suffer the effects of auto-immune diseases but for
such an ignorant statement to be PUBLISHED for pete's sake strains
credulity. Just my little rant for the day.
Sarah
On Mon, 29 May 2000 22:01:47 -0400 (EDT), Dudley...@webtv.net
(Dudley Delany) wrote:
>Hi!
Don & Janet
"evetsm" <evetsmN...@rocketmail.com.invalid> wrote...
>
> www.skepdic.com Hahahaha! You should stop reading these
> conspiracy sites and start with medline and maybe you'll learn
> something !
Steve,
How about starting a new thread if you want to debate Cayce. Dudley posted
here for only one reason, to SELL HIS OWN BOOK. He has posted this same
message on a dozen other disease groups, altered only for the appropriate
disease name. Last Jan. and Feb. the MS group nailed him for a similar post.
He does NOT have a "Psoriasis Website". What he does have is a single page
promotional piece with a couple of P links, that he has repeated over and
over with minor changes to fit the disease de jour. He has posted this same
message on everything from "alt.support.alzheimers" to
"alt.christnet.sex.irritable.bowel.syndrome".
Please, let's not get bogged down in the "for or against" Cayce stuff. Let's
make this thread just against Dudley's self-promotion of his book, and his
attempt to profit from our suffering. He does NOT have P. He does NOT have
most of the other diseases he claims to have websites for. Maybe he actually
does have MS. So what! The MS group doesn't want him either. Let's end this
thread instead of giving Dudley any more free publicity.
Janet
evetsm
I was replying to Dave's usual quackwatch shpiel, this time of
Cayce. Dave hardly mentioned the book. Not compulsory to buy the
book. I wouldn't.
DaveW
> www.skepdic.com Hahahaha! You should stop reading these
> conspiracy sites and start with medline and maybe you'll learn
> something !
Okay, Steve, we all know that anyone who doesn't agree with your
world-view is part of The Conspiracy, so my saying that your opinion of
the references I use means little to me just places me further into the
conspiracy itself, doesn't it? You obviously *refuse* to understand the
reasons for the existence of the Skeptic's Dictionary or Quackwatch, so
it's pointless to try to inform you any more.
It's sad to see your world has become so black and white when there
are such interesting shades of gray (and even colors!) present.
> Try this little illuminator, Dave, from a quote from skepdic.com
> regarding Cayce.
>
> Substitute the word "MD(s)" for all references to "Cayce" in this
> paragraph:
>
> "It is true, however, that many people considered themselves cured by
> Cayce and that's enough evidence for true believers. It works! The fact
> that thousands don't consider themselves cured or can't rationalize an
> erroneous diagnosis won't deter the true believer."
Okay, I'm illuminated. It's now plain that you consider modern medicine
to be nothing more than another viewpoint, regardless of its basis in
general science and logic. So, since any theory is as good as any
other, why aren't you presenting theories contrary to "eat like a
caveman" here? They should be just as valid, seeing as how there's
nothing inherently 'right' among *any* of them.
Is this a good world-view to have, Steve? When science shows its
strengths over and over, while psychics and the rest keep dogmatically
doing what they do in the face of conflicting evidence?
> Read this from medline and learn:
>
> The abdominal brain and enteric nervous system. McMillin DL;
> Richards DG; Mein EA; Nelson CD
>
> J Altern Complement Med, 1999 Dec, 5:6, 575-86
The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine? Abdominal
Brain? Oh, good grief. This is *not* one of your best citations, Steve.
The bias is evident even before we get to the abstract...
> Abstract
> Conventional medical treatment for neurologic disorders such as
> epilepsy, migraine, and autism focuses on the brain. Although
> standard medical treatment is often helpful, the underlying causes of
> these disorders are not well understood. Furthermore, some individuals
> respond poorly or not at all to regular medicine. Evidence is
> accumulating in the medical literature that the enteric nervous system
> (ENS)-that part of the nervous system associated with the alimentary
> canal-also plays a role in these disorders. Historically, the concept of
> an autonomous abdominal nervous system was advocated by Byron
> Robinson, Johannis Langley, and Edgar Cayce. The work of these
> three prominent historical figures is considered along with modem
> view-points on the abdominal nervous system. Complementary
> therapies that address the nervous system of the abdomen have
> potential as useful adjuncts to conventional treatment for certain
> neurologic disorders.
There's no telling, of course, *what* "medical literature" they're talking
about. Got a copy of the actual article?
> Interesting, eh ?
Not really. Cayce made readings on over 10,000 different topics. He's
*bound* to be right on something, at least partway. But it's the JACM,
forcryingoutloud. You may as well be citing from the Weekly World
News, since, to me, they've got about the same rating in terms of
"reliable sources of scientific medical information." "Stomach Brain
Escapes from Farmer, Devours Small Children. Edgar Cayce's Ghost
Says, 'Told You So!'"
> Maybe Cayce was not ALL full of it ? Maybe some of the stuff DID
> work ?
Nobody ever said he was ALL full of it. Nobody ever claimed his stuff
*doesn't* work. Where do you come up with this garbage?
I would like to see Cayce's "treatments" properly tested, wouldn't you?
Should we believe everything without such testing? What if I were to
claim that whacking psoriasis plaques with a hammer 'works'? Would
you advocate such a treatment? After all, if *someone* says it works,
there *might* be some merit to the idea (which flies in the face of what's
known about placebos). Sure can't harm you anyway, unless you've
finally developed psoriasis. Have you?
Anyway, the heart of the matter is that until Cayce's "readings" on
psoriasis are tested, any advice in them is equally as good as, say,
"pour gasoline on your psoriasis, scrub with sandpaper." It's also
equally dangerous. Because neither has been properly tested, they're
both *unknown*. Not right, not wrong, just *unknown* (and therefore
potentially deadly as well).
It is *NOT* good enough evidence that Cayce might have been 'right'
about something else. It is not good enough evidence that he was a
psychic. It is not good enough that he was and still is popular. Why is
it that you don't seem to care about the distinction between 'good'
evidence and 'bad' anymore? What's happened to you?
> Maybe he knew something that you don't ? Impossible.
Ah, you and MadDoug, both claiming that I'm a know-it-all...
I think the biggest insult you continually throw at me Steve, is that
you obviously don't *read* what I post. If you did, you'd get off this
snide "Dave knows everything" baloney, and maybe learn something
yourself.
Your incredible ignorance in this matter is magnified by the fact that
I've told you, flat out, what motivates me to post. That you willfully
ignore this is insulting to everyone - including yourself! Honestly, it makes
you look like an idiot: repeatedly attributing to me actions and
attitudes with no basis in fact - even when I *agree* with you (which
probably pains you to no end).
Your refusal to answer even simple questions ("stonewalling"), and
your refusal to get involved in any sort of relevant discussion, is evidence
that you don't give a damn about what the "truth" is, as long as you get
to keep insulting people who do care, and inventing new definitions for
old words as you go.
You've not only closed your mind, Steve, you've closed your eyes and
ears, as well.
I pity you.
K. O'Brien
> www.skepdic.com Hahahaha! You should stop reading these
> conspiracy sites and start with medline and maybe you'll learn
> something !
>
> Try this little illuminator, Dave, from a quote from skepdic.com
> regarding Cayce.
>
> Substitute the word "MD(s)" for all references to "Cayce" in this
> paragraph:
>
> "It is true, however, that many people considered themselves
> cured by Cayce and that's enough evidence for true believers. It
> works! The fact that thousands don't consider themselves cured or
> can't rationalize an erroneous diagnosis won't deter the true
> believer."
>
Geezelin geez! (I really try not to be personal and rude on the usenet, but I'm
making an exception this time.)
For crissake what planet does your species come from?
Yes, you are correct that MDs don't always cure the things they try to cure, and
treatments are not always effective but that does not put the entirety of the
medical society in the same category as our modern-day P.T. Barnum, namely Edgar
Cayce.
Suggest: Take a long draw of good air, oxygenate your brain cells and wake up to
the fact that Cayce is an entertainer, no more credible as a scientist than
David Copperfield, or any other illusionist. The thing that keeps Copperfield
on the "good" side of the line, and the rest of those charlatans (Cayce,
Kessler, et. al) on the other side is that Copperfield does not fu(# with
peoples health.
And a word on the medical community etc... Every MD in the world will have
approximately the same rate of cure with any given treatment. This remains a
fact even if the MD in question never knew the person who invented the
cure/treatment -- much less having invented the treatment himself. Cayce does
his "readings". No one else can do *his* readings. Therefore, only he can have
the effect that his treatments offer... doesn't that suggest something fishy?
If I sold you a car. You try to start it and it fails. I come along and start
it and drive away... come back and say, "it works for me". You try again and it
does not work. Is it a good car? Now, modify that just a *tiny* bit... instead
of me coming along and starting the car and driving away, I ***SAY*** I started
it and drove around, but you aren't allowed to see it... now what do you
think? Take that one step further, I get someone else to *say* that they *saw*
me do it, but you aren't allowed to see it done, and you aren't allowed to
question me directly. Now we're getting closer to Cayce...
Why would you apply ordinary reason to practical things like cars which are of
little consequence, but fail to do the same thing in the practical area of your
health? There isn't a sintilla of credibility in Cayce, his treatments, or
anyone who attempts to abuse the general public in the same way.
My vice president believes fortune telling. I asked her what proof there is for
the validity of this endeavour. She asked me what proof I had against it. So I
told her there is an elephant in the parking garage behind our building. She
said there isn't. I asked how she knew, "do you just believe there isn't or
have you looked?" This was a silly question of course... but the point is
there. She chooses to believe one thing and disbelieve another when neither are
more or less likely than the other. (actually, I think it is far more likely
that an elephant will show up, than a fortune being anything more than
categorical guesses -- otherwise all fortune tellers would be billionairs from
lottery alone)
My wife is a very practical person. She has long been a believer in hollistic
approaches to health matters. She remains a very healthy, and attractive woman
who is nearing 50 which suggests to me that her approach to health is generally
working. (actually for 50, she's stunning -- and I couldn't be happier... for me
and her). She is always curious about what alternative approaches there are to
health problems that folks have from time to time.... but she has the most
amazing ability to spot a fake at a distance... On the other hand, she has a
wonderful sister who bashed her brains on drugs when she was a much younger
woman. She buys into every bit of crap that comes down from folks like Cayce &
his ilk (hell, she even sold Meleluka for a while -- now that's a religion!).
Now, I'm not saying that self-administering a chemical lobotomy when you are
young is a *necessary* prerequisite for beliving this kind of hocus-pocus, but
I'm beginning to think it helps a lot.
.end of rant.
kob
evetsm
<kob...@isn.net> wrote:
I showed you a scientific study that says that Cayce may be onto
something with the connection between the gut and the mind. That
has got nothing to do with his psychic crap. What do you have to
say about that ? Chances are you don't have a clue.
By presuming you can absolutely trash something implies that you
know everything about it. OK, smartass answer the question
posed in the brain-stomach connection published scientific paper,
and don't give me car analogies.
It is only when you know something that you realise that you know
nothing.
Steve.
DaveW
>I showed you a scientific study that says that Cayce may be onto
>something with the connection between the gut and the mind. That
>has got nothing to do with his psychic crap.
Sure it does. It means that the authors of the paper consider a psychic
to be a reliable source of good information (supposedly, Cayce's advice
and knowledge in matters medical came - let's keep our tenses straight,
he's been dead for years - to him through psychic means). Since you
seem to consider the authors to be a good source of information, you,
too, are basing your opinions, in part, on the work of a psychic and his
'crap'. I don't have any statistics handy, but Cayce was wrong at least
a few times, and not definitively 'right' many times. What are the odds
that he was right about the independent abdominal nervous system (not
a "brain-stomach connection," which no one would argue is missing)?
Oh, your use of the word "scientific" in relation to that Medline article
(it was a review, not a study) is, in itself, telling. The Meridian Institute
is devoted to proving Cayce correct. As such, they aren't being very
scientific to begin with.
K O'Brien
It has been proven conclusively that the more churches you have in a community,
the more alcoholics you have. There is a definite correlation.
Based on that (fact) would you conclude that religion, churches, ritual, or
clergy, contribute to increased alcoholism in a society?
Your answer first, then --- the rest of the story.
'nuther point: I completely reject your assertion that you showed me a
"scientific study" which says that Cayce _may_ be onto something. However, I
have no doubt whatsoever, Cayce notwithstanding, that the gut and the mind are
linked in many ways, some which we know of, and some we don't (mine certainly is
-- every time I get hungry there is a mind-gut relationship).
Cayce remains an illusionist and a thief -- and everyone who does the same
things, or supports him, falls under the rubric of 'irrelevant'.
kob
PS: Did you do lots of drugs in your youth? Perhaps you are still in your
youth... It's not that I think everyone who did lots of drugs ends up suseptable
to the likes of Cayce, it's just that I'm seriously beginning to think it
increases the likelihood. It's astonishing to me how fantasy is more at home in
some minds than reality -- astonishing, and sad.
evetsm wrote:
> In article <393697D5...@isn.net>, "K. O'Brien"
> <kob...@isn.net> wrote:
>
> I showed you a scientific study that says that Cayce may be onto
> something with the connection between the gut and the mind. That
edgar...@my-deja.com
Database onlin at www.edgarcayce.org/hrrc/ then choose Cayce Health
Database from the subnav.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Association for Research and Enlightenment has redesigned its
popular website. A.R.E. is an international, non-profit, membership
organization founded in 1931 to preserve, research, and make available
the Edgar Cayce readings.These readings, numbering more than 14,000,
cover many subjects, including holistic health, ancient civilizations,
dream interpretation, spirituality, and much more. For more than 70
years, A.R.E. has offered a safe, sane way for individuals to delve
into subjects that are fascinating, even mysterious. Today's A.R.E. is
a network of people actively studying and applying Edgar Cayce's
tireless wisdom and practical suggestions for experiencing a better
life. A.R.E., 215 67th Street, Virginia Beach, VA 23451, 757-428-3588
In article <20000530084735...@ng-cs1.aol.com>,
hherb...@aol.com (HHerbalOne) wrote:
> >From: Dudley...@webtv.net (Dudley Delany)
> >Date: 5/29/00 9:01 PM EST
>
> >
> >Please visit my new psoriasis website:
> >
> >http://community.webtv.net/DudleyDelany/EDGARCAYCESPSORIASIS
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >
> >Dudley Delany, R.N., M.A., D.C.
>
> Unable to open
> http://community.webtv.net/DudleyDelany/EDGARCAYCESPSORIASIS. The
site
> reports that the item you requested could not be found.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
> Not Found
> The requested URL /DudleyDelany/EDGARCAYCESPSORIASIS was not found on
> this server.
> H.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
edgar...@my-deja.com
Database from the subnav.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Association for Research and Enlightenment has redesigned its
popular website. A.R.E. is an international, non-profit, membership
organization founded in 1931 to preserve, research, and make available
the Edgar Cayce readings.These readings, numbering more than 14,000,
cover many subjects, including holistic health, ancient civilizations,
dream interpretation, spirituality, and much more. For more than 70
years, A.R.E. has offered a safe, sane way for individuals to delve
into subjects that are fascinating, even mysterious. Today's A.R.E. is
a network of people actively studying and applying Edgar Cayce's
tireless wisdom and practical suggestions for experiencing a better
life. A.R.E., 215 67th Street, Virginia Beach, VA 23451, 757-428-3588
In article <20000530201334...@ng-cm1.aol.com>,